Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Optimized timestamp calculation. #851

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Mar 10, 2017

Conversation

jcbertin
Copy link
Contributor

New Pull Request Checklist

  • I have read and understood the CONTRIBUTING guide

  • I have read the Documentation

  • I have searched for a similar pull request in the project and found none

  • I have updated this branch with the latest master to avoid conflicts (via merge from master or rebase)

  • I have added the required tests to prove the fix/feature I am adding

  • I have updated the documentation (if necesarry)

  • I have run the tests and they pass

  • I have run the lint and it passes (pod lib lint)

This merge request fixes / reffers to the following issues: ...

Pull Request Description

By using POSIX API, we can further optimize timestamp calculation. On my Mac, I ran a test in a loop count of 10000000 that shows the difference:
calendar: 9.024821s
localtime: 7.373581s

@codecov-io
Copy link

Codecov Report

Merging #851 into master will decrease coverage by 0.21%.
The diff coverage is 100%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #851      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   23.07%   22.86%   -0.22%     
==========================================
  Files          16       16              
  Lines        3913     3902      -11     
  Branches      279      279              
==========================================
- Hits          903      892      -11     
  Misses       3008     3008              
  Partials        2        2
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
Classes/DDTTYLogger.m 18.18% <100%> (-0.88%)

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update ca61764...9e543c5. Read the comment docs.

@rivera-ernesto rivera-ernesto merged commit b5eac1a into CocoaLumberjack:master Mar 10, 2017
@bpoplauschi
Copy link
Member

Thanks @jcbertin

@bpoplauschi bpoplauschi added this to the 3.2.0 milestone May 3, 2017
@bpoplauschi
Copy link
Member

bpoplauschi commented Oct 3, 2018

@jcbertin Thanks a lot for showing interest and contributing to CocoaLumberjack! Even tough it’s been a while, we would like to invite you to become a maintainer – no pressure to accept! You can pitch in with what seems comfortable: comment on open issues/PRs, triage, improve documentation, write your own PRs. See a broader discussion here #941. Let me know if you are interested.

@jcbertin jcbertin deleted the jc-branch branch January 31, 2020 14:45
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

4 participants